forum.ww1aircraftmodels.com
WW1 Aircraft Modeling => WW1 Aircraft Information/Questions => Topic started by: Suffolk Lad on January 01, 2017, 09:38:58 AM
-
Hi Guys I'm wondering if any of our Nieuport aficionados can shed some light on the following.
I've recently bought the Roden Nieuport 24bis which as you probably know has parts for the 24 in as well. Also bought the second Datafile Special for reference and yesterday the Centenary Datafile 167 'Nieuport 24/27 at War'
Following Lances and Toby's recent inspirational models I'd like to do a silver aircraft, preferably an RFC one or if not possibly a Lafayette aircraft
Okay, here goes - Taking an RFC one as first choice - on page 40 of the Datafile Special, image 91 it shows Lt Clogstoun of 111 squadron in probably [sic] a 24 bis fitted with twin Lewis guns. Casting an eye down to the lower wing it gives the distinct impression that this is painted a dark colour. At first I thought this might be a trick of the light but then just recently I noticed, on page 31 image 64, a line up of both types with the nearest aircraft sporting a distinctly dark wing too. The caption refers to the possibility of this being a replacement wing from a painted aircraft.
My questions on this then is - Is this a coincidence on both aircraft from two different squadrons or was this possibly an intended scheme in some quarters ie featuring painted lower wings (as opposed to replacements) on some silver painted aircraft. I don't doubt Ray Rimell's annotation just that viewing the two images begs the question. If it is a replacement would it be right to think that it would have come from a camouflaged aircraft?
My second query concerns the struts and is a one I've pondered on for some time. It refers to the apparent 'binding' on the struts. I assume it is binding? If so I can fully understand the application on the rear struts as this is perpendicular to the grain and would provide a good resistance to splitting but I can't quite see the logic on the sloping forward struts. As I see it, for it to bind tightly, it would have to have something to prevent it slipping, eg small notches cut in or possibly small protrusions to prevent slippage when tightening it but to my mind even then it offers little to aid reinforcing. Obviously it's the way it is from an aerodynamic point of view so is it just cosmetic or is it really meant to add strength?
So - is it, in actual fact, a cord 'binding' and if so, and purely as a matter of interest, anyone have any idea how it held itself in place.
As said the first preference is the Clogstoun aircraft so if you know of the whereabouts of any other images I'd appreciate hearing about those too.
If Xan, Borsos, DaveCCW or any other of our Nieuport fans can help here it really would be much appreciated :)
Thanks in advance
Kind Regards - Tug
-
My second query concerns the struts and is a one I've pondered on for some time. It refers to the apparent 'binding' on the struts. I assume it is binding? If so I can fully understand the application on the rear struts as this is perpendicular to the grain and would
and perpendicullar (more or less) to the grain on the front struts as well! (the V wasn't cut out of a single board!)
-
(the V wasn't cut out of a single board!)
Errr, no, of course not Bo, and even if it was (very unlikely I would have thought) the question is still a valid one surely?
I'm assuming the grain would be along the length of the strut (which I believe would be connected to the front strut at their base) The binding then, on the front strut is not perpendicular to any grain but the question still remains about its efficacy at such an angle 'to the strut' and how its kept in place - just try wrapping a cord tightly across a similar section at such an angle and I'm sure you'll see my reasoning.
I'm not intending to be dismissive here Bo, just don't quite see your logic. Thanks for the input though.
A Happy New Year to you and all others looking in
Regards - Tug
-
Well I can't quite see that either RB :)
If it's as you say then why would such a structural member as the front strut have a grain other than running along it's length.
This isn't about grain direction - It's about why the front binding is at an angle to the strut itself and how it is kept in place. If this is binding then in another world it's considered 'whipping' (which is what you describe) and that can only be applied at right angles to the object being whipped unless it's movement is restricted in some way to prevent slippage. To do it at an angle creates immediate self releasing 'loops' at even the slightest amount of slackening. As you rightly say any form of notch would raise a stress point which is why I ask the question - if it is binding how is it held in place, at that angle, on that front strut.
On the scale of things this isn't too important model wise - it's mainly one of pure interest though I would like to replicate it on the model. 'Mechanically speaking, I just don't see the logic of it though.
I appreciate your replies guys but please don't fixate on this matter too much - I'd much rather however hear something knowledgeable about those painted lower wings :)
Kind Regards - Tug
-
The stuff is glued to the strut. The angle is a nod to aerodynamics (however ineffectual).
-
Ergo - cosmetic as thought then Bo - my thanks :) but is it a cord binding or some kind of strap?
Now about that wing :-\ said he hopefully
Regards - Tug
-
Well after a bit of further searching I found a completely new site (to me) with some very good close ups of a 23 restoration. This had never come up in searches before on my previous questions.
Assuming it has been restored to original specification it would appear that this is some kind of cloth banding perhaps - zooming in certainly gives that impression. The way that has been applied around that forward strut at that angle still makes my brain wince as to how (if it's wound on that is) - I'm going to go for self adhesive strips and done with it ::)
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/BiMxU3ytczDQOhl1Gz2CCQ-5UGWNyWH7xnB-LTRdbeA3w4R_zcuvM4uNWf_8flF1Ihua090m20SxlvcRv96u8Tp8-8gVKexCbvkfmWhRV7iSxwwFQb-799socdf0A8x8QvJKWfKozvc3dC3GeA90jbmzTGOI3AtTbtFwyvfCjhbVVymV4DAW6m-bFl9STX6P0-3IxnnDHZfA9aGV-cL2Nl2s6KH7K4ggFnQ7S8H11Bb3l-qws5E42qpCJhn9FWQimfru-IH_O8cPCBgHEoiz0GMJo9QTtDuODLXJiObKzVlklgbe_34PUIqwodaQsRIsE9kYIV7d2lcXxvWbfe839kWrF5gtollhDNAWMzesK0jlQ_XoJSDypI5cVaKlH_QQkBXF5eHF6cZSr56AilHADg2FyPY3P2_aPGlBGTFiw_q6uUqzPF0XQlEA2IIpEw3Sepfdt_qHI0ky2Il09LSYYWwnGjrTiLLXS12MX7ZJHt2eQ2QFm9R8dXCk0zaormd_7fjokcDSII7TEp-En70w4rKJRhgEU_KwUXurwMp0f7PW_rm0bq08ajZlA18NZRHG2NY8zqk-OMHWfGfnWVXd_JtQf6rwbe0dBwBgrC9kYMe6KyGlYg7g=w790-h592-no)
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/kRyiuFXRUr5A_ENxVqAJZugpWTvBErja5-3ySjyOhWy-K1qBpDWKvd_JaDrWTBkweI-vHI2-3IEkoXJy7Nt3OFRYtGCO5iKrLnuQVtHpyMqA4QAqqh9rY6Bwa_vy9lAveFMrwaGWtMFTNqFozZPjoJPqpfxcZB_X45xi7bqF9szQlK9tymDDDyMX29KhZTkpDroI0UviplI5gp9JYZQ9Oo1YLTUc48dIkWbMJcjTsCo56I2u24HXPCScof5T2QH6VrUsA90MIoluIpIbOwhAFMer5XzWNR1J_6jLoMiXkl8ARS1pfM_wcQInxZxnBE3Rsd-bv8VMoVY1r9a-NDRFRr6VDSe7FEGqwCRgFamgAH1K2VAR1Weqfj09AFyxgGW1pkvrZBWCCJx8ju6hBeVkrXoOkmtC3BpwejfE-yX2l20bH52Oiq02qnObN1XRaex9y4Ai1G04yGFPNBh0qGYtUJQoghI9VuW0vk-Z4RpmahgO65IoRsqEyM6jpHEMQc4rT7YR4NOi9EzcTXE65TBlQqf3G3LUCjEZ2Helkj1z06U2G4l9lZ32-jRZOqYtBfpjVcr5zMMnwNcEo-ka3HyZUzbCWnCGdWHX5jLifx0m9AiWSuqVlyD2=w790-h592-no)
Some of the other pics absolutely confirmed the answer to my previous question about the make up of the forward fuse sides too so that was a real bonus ;)
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/6e-LZBdgblNLTMzUyURJdgCOIr-I0DaTJmXlPwyGZG-i1lch2uqnv7hRsNZ6MrpaqZAzCvoJ5Gtw8_9D_i4e2z4ytKs7-7vCbDXylazjKzYI0hUhcIA06EeSaYChBrHR6y_YbRg4pRxPFub65aSHHIY5mVmenkPvvbEZup1PR7fVSwq9k1i4Z5pLjwREpHj3N_H2P670hgilRn4P-RST5P2ubR4gknhvTL1rjWRzKf1LElSagZrKV16fsE4gpfjReEA7P2jNZjVzjW6v884AukJKwnRQktFR3wh8qMZQfESWoStjhO1pscR1Pi4DLWRmb5jbHK8kSghv3NxMkkVzJp3zB5GZkfvp2b2vBq4PbrbplhU_aMNXuVGx-WB0sv5t7FeaIiq8VmaBi7tzzD8zTGH2BrLY3IcntcGREsskaSXyXS8lqtCOo0EnewpWH2yn9a6Tfb8tU_D87Vv38Qfz0PhgKU4wjLIU2ywRkLblqXTxsO09lT49xBLwF0P_juhneVWdYMfa3wbRE0IWAvC2SND9DHxcSKHL7DYpXlxDH1LgtIeW9bTaaSvprGmDd8eXVmTXCB_1nOKQUtX46X86VuPEV1eJmeHktH3hMHyvUDCVkG_OO1jK=w800-h600-no)
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/vQFq6VsRmNIjM-5sTeKMUcuJ5Oexkg4tkdBMfx0w2KmnfdjUhhv14rvx2os46Xhlq8gusaiewy-S6_TPEdVQLpedsbHKQ9nJABD4FZbKF5uZH2j_zj127zGz88F3n-V9ggZY6-8Yy_UaZxfxp0mB3tcOpGjmmpjj_a81a259mhAEH_l5NFTZU6meU433OHmJrHvrL1S_y6ZkdEdN8vreo2zvEj8jGCOQzCMCHzTvPtSyCQZN84BF68_OB-h03g61hwGLbd3KAg7lJk1TZJl0eOAo7e4euuDtwxjWhq7eedddcjwpB-JEuh3_74xfjCcw2G-PJf4PGN6SGXa83s3UGQEtVk5pTNgQFcCbMrMMqm3y1s2tYeIwKOV3tN-CJ3suxpWS2PpTFU_gU3pPM7TlzMLq68yDcY_0kIjKvo9l3NLBw_Jvm6Cx8BpM2eY3jJWtZjEhYP3EKk-fmDV4QlR490mDpOCb8wdrhT-Vo-B8F2g4uebgF92HZKCOaGxge-2QzqPybuBpSPEQE0chDunonNbPrYLtWCQqfnaoQUB-U3xHxDxCD6Tit8tH4rhiPLqiLC5YISAQ3BgVRre8t0Nq2eN2zOjJLBmfB2ufczy7gB9Jn65FnU_z=w790-h592-no)
Just that wing then :) Aw! come on guys - surely you're not going to let me paint one wing only to tell me after its built the other should have been too :-\
Kind regards - Tug
-
Tug, I'm not a noop expert -- we have those here and hopefully one will chime in soon -- but my understanding has always been these are cloth reinforcements doped onto the struts. Ray Rimmel is always bemoaning kit makers who depict these as overly raised. I don't think they were cord windings..
-
so a little digging around, came across this, may be of interest:
Yes this is the first I have heard of Red tapes on the V struts. The latest research by Allan Toelle (I believe he examined an actual piece of a Nieuport 16 strut with the tape) was that the tapes were a horizon blue color similar to the French uniforms. This ws the same color used to outline the wings and tail surface. Also metal parts like struts and undercarrage were painted this same color similar to the paint used on the Adrian helmets. Profiles showing this scheme are shown in the Windsock Lafayette Flyers book as well as a couple of issues of Windsock magazines 2 or 3 years ago.
Dave
earlier in the thread Dan San Abbot refers to them as "natural linen cord bindings" but honestly I'd put whatever Allan Toelle says on this subject ahead of DSA.
http://www.theaerodrome.com/forum/showthread.php?t=45283
-
This is from the USAF museum repro N 28, the reproduction is regarded as very high quality:
(http://www.wwi-models.org/Photos/Fre/Nie28/USAFM//LaKr/013_11.jpg)
Original Bebe at Le Bourget -- I took some photos of this as well, will try to dig them out:
(http://www.wwi-models.org/Photos/Fre/Nie11/Bourget//NiRa/nrnie11_03.jpg)
-
I did some digging around in Flight magazine, didn't come across a direct reference to what exactly Nieuport struts were wrapped with, despite many technical descriptions of Nieuport designs, so my thinking is that is was pretty unremarkable to the writers of the day. Here linen cloth reinforcements are mentioned on another type:
https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1917/1917%20-%200200.html
You might find this interesting; it is a translation of German reports of the Nieuports published in Flight in 1917 :
https://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1917/1917%20-%200884.html
-
Tug,
I used Tamiya Tape for my "wraps" and applied thin CA after installing them in the same orientation as Bo's photo of the La Bourget Bebe. I went through the same logic as you describe; applying the tapes at an angle (to the strut's axis) as illustrated not only made no sense structurally but also made me nervous about how long they would last on the model without starting to peel off! I spent some considerable time in the books and on-line to no avail, all refs pointed to the tapes being aligned to the Aircraft's fore and aft axis, not the strut's orientation as installed. Getting the little buggers installed so was a challenge, as you point out they want to slide perpendicular to the struts axis, and it took several attempts for each one.
As for the wing colours I have no definitive answer either, I hope one of our Noop experts can help! The switching/replacing of wings is a possibility but would depend on the maintenance "trail"; were RFC Nieuports repaired or supplied through RFC Depots or the through the French Logistical System?
Cheers,
Lance
-
Bo - my sincere appreciation for your input :) I shall take great pleasure at perusing those links.
Looking at the N28 restoration pic and that of the Belgian 23 I would agree that cloth it is. I had always assumed it was meant for reinforcing but there seems little value in that - possibly it was just a Nieuport 'thing'.
The light blue as mentioned by 'Dave' in your quote is confirmed in the Belgian pics which also has the hall marks of a careful restoration. (Would that be Dave Calhoun - Dave CCW BTW ?)
Hopefully others will look in and comment (especially about the wing colour ;)) - but again my thanks to you for your interest and help.
Best Regards - Tug
Your post has just come up Lance - thanks to you too. I'm glad to see I'm not the only one to think about these 'wraps'. Now I know, I'm happy to go ahead and use something self adhesive - probably the vinyl sheet I've used before.
If all else fails I'll do the wing as suggested in the Datafile - it'll no doubt make a conversation piece if nothing else ;)
Tug
PS Have just got the top wing on the SE5 :)
-
Hi Tug,
I think I do have some information about the wing question. I am not at my library but will post it asap!
Borsos
-
I had always assumed it was meant for reinforcing but there seems little value in that - possibly it was just a Nieuport 'thing'.
Certainly the purpose is reinforcing -- but it's like a story I once heard by the guy who owns the Victor Mousetrap company (biggest manufacturer of mousetraps in the US): he is constantly receiving ideas for a "better mousetrap" and in fact the designs he gets are often demonstrably superior in some way or another versus the old board & spring trap -- but the fact is the problem of killing mice just isn't difficult enough (they are stupid, have very small ranges, etc.) to warrant changing production to "a better mousetrap." The dumb old spring mousetrap does a perfectly good job of killing mice.
So, you are quite right that from a mechanical standpoint gluing the wrapping obliquely with respect to grain is suboptimal, but I would argue that it was plenty good enough, and either aesthetically or because the designers perceived a slight aero advantage, they choose "adequate" versus optimal.
Glued wrapping, even obliquely in respect to the run of the grain, is going the help keep the strut from splintering at the forces involved. If you do an image search on "struts" on a site like aviadejavu.ru (a compendium of zillions of aircraft images, quite possibly not all legitimately obtained), you'll find hundreds of period drawings of strut ends and fittings -- that was where the engineering problem of the day was centered -- and not the integrity of the middle of the strut -- just not that big of a problem, like killing the poor little mouse.
-
O.K., I came home faster than expected.
I can't add more to the struts question besides, yes I would say too it was canvas and painted horizon blue on early Nieuports, silver doped from Nieuport 16 N1109 onwards (probabely the first Nieuport painted in silver dope according to Bernard Klaeylé and Marc Chassard).
Now my two cents on the "Wing question":
I Checked the references you mentioned.
WDF Special, Vol. 2:p. 31, pic. no- 64 is that famous squadron 1 picture that is published in many publications. The Serials are erased by the censor, but it has a date: 27 Dec 1917. The first plane in the row, marked with an "H" shows a dark lower wing (solid color? I can't see no traces of a camouflage demarcation - neither I can see other Nieuports with dark lower wings...)
WDF Special, Vol. 2, p. 40, pic. no. 91 is T O Clogston in a Nieuport from 111 Squadron. Undated picture, no serial. There's also a dark colored lower wing (at least part of it).
besides of the WDFs I consulted "Nieuports in RNAS, RFC and RAF Service", published by Cross and Cockade International in 2007 (sadly oop. today). It's really a valuable source when it comes to British flown Nieuports.
1 Squadron flew Nieuports 17, 23, 23bis, 24, 24bis and 27. Received Nieuport 17 in Jan 1917. The new Nieuports (24, 24bis, 27) were issued on 15 August 1917 and the squadron dropped their last Nieuport on 24 Jan 1918 in favor of Se 5a's.
Although the serials on the mentioned pic are erased, 1 Squadron surely flew the Ni 24/Ni 24bis B3607, B3608, B3609, B3612, B3613, B3614, B3617 and Nieuport 27 B3629.
On p. 130 the Nieuport marked with "H" is identified as a Nieuport 27 with the serial B3629. There's a color profile on p. 77 depicting this very plane with lower wings painted RED and red squadron/flight leader steams. The plane was flown by 2LT W W Rogers, 2Lt P Wilson and 2LT G B Moore (shown on the mentioned photo). On 17 Dec 1917 it overturned on landing (and was repaired? Probabely...).
There are many other color profiles in the book, several show Nieuports 24/24bis/27 in silver grey or French 5-color camouflage (introduced in October 1917).
111 Squadron flew in Egypt (not on the Western Front) and was equipped only with Nieuports 23/23bis. These were shipped unassembled, in parts and had to be reconstructed at Squadron level. They used them until Jan 1918. I quote P. 62: "There were never more than six or seven Nieuports on strength in 111 Squadron, of which half were always unserviceable." There are some color profiles of Nieuports from 111 Squadron as well, some equipped with camouflaged spare parts.
Given these informations I personally would say with quite few doubts that the dark lower wings were NO certain squadron marking but either camouflaged replacements or (B3629) painted in a color that was possibly red. The question is: If they used spare parts from other, camouflaged Nieuports, what camouflage color had these had? In the case of B3629 in my opinion much speaks for a solid color, so red would be a good choice, but PC 10 isn't impossible neither, because several British flown Nieuports 24/24bis/27 were repainted in PC 10 at the repair shops. Can't say anything about the 111 Squadron Nieuport besides that it should have been a Nieuport 23 or 23bis (contrary to the WDF that depicts it as "probabely a Nieuport 24bis"), probabely/maybe with a camouflaged lower wing (French 5 Color camouflage).
I of course cannot post these color profiles here due to copyright issues. But I can't see any problems in making a pic and email it to you, Tug, if you PM me your e-mail adress.
I hope that helps. Browsing through the book made me again wanting to build a Nieuport... :)
Best wishes
Borsos
-
Hi Bo and Borsos -
I intended to answer this tonight but have hit a real tiredness peak so will respond tomorrow. My thanks indeed though guys :)
Tug
-
Hi Bo and Borsos
Boy was I tired, I guess that was the night before catching up with me ::)
Bo , size of mice not withstanding :D my thoughts were that given the component and its design requirement wrapping a thin section of tape round would offer little extra strength - especially in the apparent thin layer(s) and at such spaced intervals. Obviously it must add something but on the scale of things - were the part to be stressed enough to split - possibly not a lot. Thinking about the front strut - if that wrapping was more than one layer and continuous it would need to be a developed shape similar to VVV to be able to do so - not likely I fear. Whatever - as said, I can see now what's required and now have a clear vision that it's not a binding and as such just how they got it to stay at that angle on the front strut - at last my mind is at rest on this one ;).
Borsos - thanks for coming back so quickly last yesterday
I have a lot to learn! For me, to-date, modelling has been about visual impression - to try to make something look as realistic as possible and images have always played the greater part in any initial inspiration. With input received on that last Nieuport build from yourself and the other kind members on here, and that of Lance and Rick putting me right on the SE5 I can see that one has to be so careful about getting the facts right too.
I really would value any help you can give and will PM you as suggested. I like the sound of the red wings but would like to do the Clogstoun craft with the twin Lewis mounting more. I find the asymmetry of one camou'd wing appealing too but I will now need to find info on 23's and see if the Roden kit can be used to convey one.
My thanks again Borsos and I must just say that once again I have found this Forum and it's most knowlegeable members to be so friendly and helpful at times like this - my thanks to all of you too, whenever you've taken time to answer.
Kind Regards - Tug
-
I really would value any help you can give and will PM you as suggested. I like the sound of the red wings but would like to do the Clogstoun craft with the twin Lewis mounting more. I find the asymmetry of one camou'd wing appealing too but I will now need to find info on 23's and see if the Roden kit can be used to convey one.
My thanks again Borsos and I must just say that once again I have found this Forum and it's most knowlegeable members to be so friendly and helpful at times like this - my thanks to all of you too, whenever you've taken time to answer.
Kind Regards - Tug
Tug,
I am afraid that the Roden kits are not right for the 23. The 23 was a slab sided Nieuport and did not have the rounded stringer and former fuselage nor the different upper wing. The 23 was in fact fairly identical to a 17 with the Vickers mounted in a different location. I don't remember but there may be a slight difference in the rigging. So the Hobbycraft/Academy NIeuport 17 is the only kit to use as a basis :(
RAGIII
-
Hello Rick - My thanks but yes I have now realised that from the Vol 1 Datafile but thanks to some great help from Borsos I now have a subject in an N27 (B 3629) from 1 Squadron.
All this only serves to accentuate my extremely (read nil) knowledge on the subject all round - making the models is one thing getting them historically correct is another. I'd need another lifetime to begin to acquire such info. I have a feeling that I will be needing to ask more questions of members in the future - so far the response has been very kind - very kind indeed.
Thanks for your input too Rick - really, much appreciated :)
Regards - Tug